Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30361555›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2018

Modelling Self-Organization in Complex Networks Via a Brain-Inspired Network Automata Theory Improves Link Reliability in Protein Interactomes.

Carlo Vittorio Cannistraci

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Carlo Vittorio CannistraciBiomedical Cybernetics Group, Biotechnology Center (BIOTEC), Center for Molecular and Cellular Bioengineering (CMCB), Center for Systems Biology Dresden (CSBD), Department of Physics, Technische Universität Dresden, Tatzberg 47/49, 01307, Dresden, Germany. kalokagathos.agon@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0100-8410
Center for Systems Biology Dresden · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein interactomes are epitomes of incomplete and noisy networks. Methods for assessing link-reliability using exclusively topology are valuable in network biology, and their investigation facilitates the general understanding of topological mechanisms and models to draw and correct complex network connectivity. Here, I revise and extend the local-community-paradigm (LCP). Initially detected in brain-network topological self-organization and afterward generalized to any complex network, the LCP is a theory to model local-topology-dependent link-growth in complex networks using network automata. Four novel LCP-models are compared versus baseline local-topology-models. It emerges that the reliability of an interaction between two proteins is higher: (i) if their common neighbours are isolated in a complex (local-community) that has low tendency to interact with other external proteins; (ii) if they have a low propensity to link with other proteins external to the local-community. These two rules are mathematically combined in C1*: a proposed mechanistic model that, in fact, outperforms the others. This theoretical study elucidates basic topological rules behind self-organization principia of protein interactomes and offers the conceptual basis to extend this theory to any class of complex networks. The link-reliability improvement, based on the mere topology, can impact many applied domains such as systems biology and network medicine.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalProtein Interaction MapsAnimalsBrainGene OntologyHumansSaccharomyces cerevisiae

Identifiers

PMID30361555
PMCPMC6202355
OpenAlexW2897624302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.